Exhausting all opportunities
Faculty members plan to hold a vote of no confidence against Russi

By Colleen J. Miller
Editor in Chief

An anonymous group of faculty put its negative
opinion of Oakland University’s leadership in writing,
prompting two professors to come forward and organize
a vote of no confidence. The vote, which holds no official
weight, is used in university settings to push a president out of office.
“It’s an extreme measure people only come to when
they feel they’ve exhausted all opportunities,” said
Shea Howell, communication professor and chair of the
Communication and Journalism Department. Howell
and David Garfinkle, professor of physics, signed an email sent to faculty last week pledging to organize the
vote.
“Traditionally a vote of no confidence in the president
of the university is a statement by the faculty (saying)
the university is broken,” Garfinkle said. The professor said the desired outcome of the no confidence vote
would be for Russi to leave office by the request of the
board of trustees that appointed him or by resignation.
However, OU’s board has shown an outpouring of
support for Russi in two meetings in the past week (see
page 7 for story).
Student liaison to the board Tawnee Milko said in her
time as a student, the board has always been supportive
of Russi and the administration, and Russi has always
seemed to truly care about the student body.
Howell thinks the board’s opinions may be able to be
swayed, as more information is uncovered.
“The board spoke without any knowledge,” Howell
said. “This isn’t about whether (Russi’s) nice to talk to.
This is about how do you decide the direction of the university and what kind of atmosphere you create … The
heart of the university are the things (the board) can’t
see unless they talk to students, faculty and clerical.
Hopefully once they hear some of that they’ll change.”
To educate the public and the board, this anonymous
group of faculty (which is currently of unknown size)
has outlined grievances with the president and the
administration in a “bill of particulars.”
“The first step is to go ahead and articulate what the
case is,” Garfinkle said. Howell said there were more
than a dozen faculty members adding to the list in an
e-mail chain, and nobody made a peep at last week’s
faculty union meeting of about 50 where the list was
presented.
An “adversarial atmosphere,” preventing direct contact between faculty and the board of trustees, and failure to provide information about the medical school are
among the grievances cited in the bill.
However, some of the “particulars” are not solely the
president’s responsibility.
For example, Russi is cited as failing to provide information regarding the medical school, but releasing that

information is up to the general counsel’s office (OU’s
legal office).
“The president doesn’t handle every day-to-day
concern,” said Dave Groves, OU’s assistant director of
media relations. “That’s why he has a cabinet and that’s
why they have deans and chairs and the rest.”
“None of it seems to really add up to really specific,
tangible gripes,” said OU media relations Director Ted
Montgomery. “They seem to be talking almost in philosophical terms rather than tangible terms.”
Although it was ultimately resolved in the recent
contract negotiations, governance is the topic of another
document being passed around.
“The past few years have seen persistent and continuing assaults on shared governance, open communication
and the eroding of trust between the faculty and Gary
Russi,” the document states.

WHERE IT’S BEEN DONE

A vote of no confidence has been used at other universities, like Harvard and University of California, and
does not carry any certain consequences.
“I’m not sure that we know that we would need a plan
of action,” said Groves, on what would happen if there
was a majority vote. “If you look at what’s happening at
other universities, there are presidents serving who’ve
had no confidence votes against them who continue to
serve. The bigger question is, regardless of a vote, how
do you address the root of the problem? And I think
that’s what Dr. Russi and the administration are trying
to do.”

UNION INVOLVEMENT

While the professors’ union is serving as a platform
for the effort, the union is not officially involved.
“We would not instruct our members one way or the
other. We do not have any official position in either
endorsing or refuting it,” said Karen Miller, vice president of OU’s AAUP chapter.
An article published on the AAUP’s national website
actually recommends “if your campus can avoid a noconfidence vote, do so.”
The article suggests an alternate problem-solving
method that includes an investigation of the problems.
Miller said that based on her personal interactions
with professors, the opinions are mixed.
“I have talked to 30-40 faculty and there are a few
who very much oppose it and more than a few who very
much support it and a fairly substantial bunch in the
middle ... considering the ideas put on the table,” she
said.

TAKING ACTION

Russi is taking a proactive approach to the criticism
and responded to the documents by sending an e-mail

JASON WILLIS/The Oakland Post

President Gary Russi listens intently during the BOT meeting.

to the OU staff list on Friday, Oct. 6.
“I see this as a call to open broader communication
not only on these particular concerns, but also any
issues important to successful governance of the university,” he wrote.
“In this spirit, I am planning to meet with authors
of the letter as soon as possible. I am also planning to
meet with the academic deans and department chairs to
learn what measures we might take to improve communication and the shared governance process.”
Russi did reach out to the only two names publicly
associated with this action.
Garfinkle has a meeting scheduled with Russi on
Wednesday and Howell met with Russi on Tuesday.
“Both Shea Howell and I made it clear to him we
are not authors, leaders or sole forces behind this,”
Garfinkle said.
OU media relations also said Russi has already met
with several department chairs to look for solutions to
the items listed in the bill of particulars.
“He’s soliciting their advice on how better to do
this, how to make clear channels of communication,”
Montgomery said.
Howell said she requested Russi call an open forum
with the entire faculty.
Montgomery pointed out that the board meetings
are always open to the public and that faculty should
attend those because that’s where the university carries
out most of its business.
“This is going to be a process of discovery through
which he gets the input from campus leaders on how
best to do this. You don’t solve it overnight and you
don’t solve it in a forum in one afternoon,” Montgomery
said.
The vote is planned to be done online, confidential,
and possibly before December 1.

Pg 6 campus 11-11

TAKING ACTION WHERE IT’S BEEN DONE By Colleen J. Miller Russi is taking a proactive approach to the criticism and responded to the documents by sending an e-mail JASON WILLIS/The Oakland Post Editor in Chief President Gary russi listens intently during the BoT meeting.